Roughly 50 people attended a Monday, Feb. 13 Planning Board hearing on whether the King George Inn property should be designated as an area in need of redevelopment. Several residents wore cardboard Burger King crowns reading "Save the KGI."

Warren Planning Board recommends redevelopment for King George Inn

Roughly 50 people attended a Monday, Feb. 13 Planning Board hearing on whether the King George Inn property should be designated as an area in need of redevelopment. Several residents wore cardboard Burger King crowns reading "Save the KGI."

WARREN TWP. - About 50 residents – many of them wearing cardboard Burger King crowns reading “Save the KGI” – attended a Monday, Feb. 13 Planning Board hearing concerning the development of the King George Inn property.

At the request of the site owner, the Township Committee passed a resolution in December authorizing the Planning Board to conduct a preliminary investigation into whether the property on Mount Bethel Road is an area in need of redevelopment, and to make a recommendation back to the committee. The Planning Board voted 10-0 at Monday’s meeting to recommend the property be designated as a non-condemnation area in need of redevelopment.

A number of current and former Warren residents spoke before the Planning Board of the historical significance of the 200-year-old building and the need to preserve it. Though the redevelopment designation stops well short of guaranteeing the preservation of the building, Township Planner John Chadwick explained creating a redevelopment zone gives the township, “a heck of a lot more control over what goes on.”

Chadwick described the redevelopment process as a tool used by the township to enter into a contract with the developer. Whereas regular zoning regulations only go so far, the creation of a redevelopment zone allows the township to control additional aspects of development down to the appearance and architecture of the buildings. The non-condemnation clause means the township has no intention of using eminent domain on the property.

Chadwick and Planning Board members stressed several times during the meeting that the lot is private property, and the property owner, developer Rocco Varma, controls whether the historic building is demolished or not. Varma has previously stated that the building is beyond rehabilitation, and is considering building condominiums on the site.

“We don’t know what is going to happen here, but we don’t want the building to disappear in the process,” Chadwick said. “...We, being the Township of Warren, don’t own that building. That isn’t going to be our investment. Somebody (the site owner) is going to make that decision, and we’re going to try to influence its outcome with all the efforts we have.”

Chadwick found the building to be in need of redevelopment on several grounds, most significantly that it is deteriorating, through the examination of uncompleted building permits and other violations. The planner said the township has not authorized the building inspector to inspect the building, because doing so would almost certainly result in the building being torn down. He said the inspector would find the building to be deteriorating, or unfit, and would be obliged to recommend to the property owner that the building be demolished.

If the Township Committee follows the board’s recommendation and designates the property as a non-condemnation area in need of redevelopment, the developer will return to the Planning Board to work out the specifics of a redevelopment plan. Questions about the use of the property and the future of the building – the two most prevalent topics among residents speaking at the public hearing – would be addressed then in public hearings to be held by the Planning Board. Chadwick said he expects those proceedings to take place by the end of 2017.

“We don’t know whether it can be saved,” Chadwick said in response to a question from Historic Sites Committee Chairman Rory Britt. “It isn’t ruled out, but we don’t know. The best thing I can give you is a definite maybe.”

Max Hayden III was sworn in to testify at the hearing by his full name, Maximilian James Hayden III. Hayden’s family – his grandparents, followed by his parents and uncle – owned and operated the King George Inn from the 1950s through the 1980s. When people reminisce about the King George Inn as it used to be, those are the years they talk about.

Hayden has launched an online petition on Change.org to save the historic building. In less than a week, the petition had garnered more than one thousand signatures.

“Part of the reason we’re all here and why there are 1,178 signatures on the Change.org petition site is because we care about history, we care about this building,” said Hayden.

Hayden said residents care about the building’s history in the traditional sense, mentioning Woodrow Wilson’s 1912 campaign speech from the inn’s front porch. He said residents also care about the inn’s history in a more personal sense – the history created there through countless fond memories of the inn. He said one can get a sense of that history when reading the more than 500 comments on the petition.

Hayden, who now lives in Hopewell Township, is an architect, and is chair of Hopewell’s Historic Preservation Commission. He says the building can, and should, be saved, if township officials think outside the box and find an “adaptive re-use” for the building.

Planning Board Chair Peter Villani welcomed the comments, and said such ideas would be welcome whenever the process returns to the Planning Board.

“At some point in the near future we’re going to get it back again,” Villani said of the King George Inn redevelopment proceedings. “And when we do get it back again, we’d appreciate you coming back up. Because if we can incorporate some of what you just talked about into whatever’s going to be put there, I think it’ll be a win for everybody.”

Hayden thanked Villani and the board, and reiterated the need to think outside the box, responding in particular to residents who commented on the petition saying they were wary of spending taxpayer money to preserve the building.

“We’re requesting a conversation,” Hayden said. “We’re requesting a team approach. So often development is done in a vacuum. Sure, everyone likes money, everyone likes to make money – but history, no one owns it. We all own it. And we all have a share in it.”

Several residents spoke in favor of saving the building, perhaps none of them as passionately as Betty Grossweiler, a Warren resident of 63 years. Grossweiler teared up at the podium speaking of the number of historic buildings that have been torn down in Warren over the years.

“I’ve seen a lot of historic things torn down, like the schoolhouse on Mount Bethel Road,” Grossweiler said. “That was heartbreaking. Now another thing? Come on, don’t keep tearing things down. This town was nice when I moved here 63 years ago. Well it’s certainly not nice now.”

She said she has seen many changes in town – some good, some bad – and losing the King George Inn would certainly be a bad one. Grossweiler, like many of the speakers, was greeted with applause when she returned to her seat.

Basking Ridge resident Susan Page Convery, who lived in Warren from 1962 through 2008, said the redevelopment designation is a good idea, but noted little can keep the site owner from demolishing the inn unless the township purchases the property.

“All these other ideas that are being presented tonight – they’re all moot unless the town can purchase it, because we can’t force a private owner to do what we’d like him to do with it,” Convery said.

Villani said the board will do what it can to preserve the historic nature of the site.

“Whatever happens, we’re not going to lose sight of the fact that this is a very important piece of property,” Villani said. “And we’re going to try our best with the help of directing whoever the developer is. We have leverage... in getting them to try to put something together that does not eliminate the feeling and look of what the King George Inn was.”

Ongoing Process

Township Committeeman Gary DiNardo, who sits on the Planning Board, said the committee will vote on the recommendation at an upcoming meeting, though not necessarily the next meeting on Thursday, Feb. 16.

Hayden said after the meeting he was encouraged.

“I’m happy that they put the non-condemnation clause on there, that they’re seeking development proposals keeping the original building,” Hayden said. “For me, it’s all about the original building. Would I love another restaurant to go through there and be what the King George Inn was? Sure. Is that a reality? I don’t know. But if we keep what we see from Mt. Bethel Road intact, I think that’s the most important part of the building. So I’m pretty darn happy.”

Watch this discussion.Stop watching this discussion.

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Be Yourself. We do not accept and will not approve
anonymous comments. If your username is not your name, please sign
your posts as you would a letter to the editor with your full name
and hometown.Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language.PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated.Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything.Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism
that is degrading to another person.Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts.Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness
accounts, the history behind an article.